I’m sure it’s been surpassed many times since then, but for a while one of the biggest awards of punitive damages in a sexual harassment case was against one of America’s biggest law firms. Basically, one of its partners was a serial harasser, and the firm did squat about it other than some minor, Catholic-church style “reassignment.” Why would a firm filled with astute legal minds, including many who practice in the field of employment litigation, take no action against this partner and thereby allow itself to be exposed to significant liability? Ha ha. Rhetorical question of course; we all know the answer — money!

Speaking of odd incentivizing: I knew someone who had a lovely, big dog. It was a golden coloured Alsatian. This dog was fine with people but didn’t like other dogs, which she would attack. The owner, in the course of pulling her away, would give her dog a treat, thereby unwittingly rewarding and reinforcing the unwanted behaviour. Here’s the kicker: the dog’s owner was a psychologist!

Just in case anyone was wondering whether workplaces are still hostile for women, here we have amazing additional evidence that being male is seen as a pretty good career move at Fox especially.

#4

Yes, but the contract was renewed before it became trendy for advertisers to abandon him, meaning all the dollar signs were still nicely lined up. The harassment was never a problem until the money no longer added up.